A couple of corrections 1)san Marino indipendence was first attested in the 12th century as refuasal to pay taxes to pope, there is no proof it was indipendent before and all the reason to believe that it was part of the pontifical state. 2) the Vatican or pontifical state was first made indipendent by Charlemagne, then it was conquered by Italy and then, after 59 years , it was reacreated by Mussolini as part of the Lateran pacts. 3) while most people believe Italian is a romance lenguage and a dialect of Latin, that old theory is being increasingly challenged by our growing understanding of Latin and it’s evolution, now day linguist would point out that Italian is a direct evolution and continuation of late Roman latin which in turn was the lenguage of the western Roman Empire and a natural evolution of Classical Latin, making Italian effectively modern latin (or the closer thing to it at least). 4) related to the above, latin is historically divided in Archaic Latin (romolus),old latin (Punic wars eras), classical latin (Caesar to third century and then lingua franca and then late latin( from which Italian evolved) all these were not necessarily intelligible between each others for example Cicero wasn’t capable of understanding archaic latin believing it to be etruscan (which is non a indoeuropea lenguage). Classical Latin was spoken as standard lenguage only from a the times of Caesar to the third century AD and in the late empire was used as a lingua franca for the two halves of Rome,the official lenguage of the west was Late Roman latin ( aka proto Italian) and the most used lenguage of the east was Greek.
Thanks for the corrections! I sometimes overlook things, but here's what I found lemme know if my sources are off 1) while it's true the independence of San Marino in 301 is only backed up really by legend, we know for certain that by 755 AD San Marino was functionally independent thanks to the Liber Pontificalis and by the 8th century we know it was called the Abbot of San Marino 2) yea, true. The Vaticans legitimacy to Rome isn't through the Papal States, but from the Popes themselves, because the Papal states have had an interesting history to say the least 3) this one is complex. Because it depends. I'll assume you're Italian because you called the Papal States, the Pontifical State like Stato Pontifico in Italian. Then for example how do you determine which "Italian language" is standard Italian and which is a Dialect of it (assuming for a second all the languages of Italy are Italian dialects and not unique languages). The Kingdom of Italy chose Florentine and Tuscan to be the standard, so that is considered standard Italian, but they could have just as easily chosen Sardinian or Sicilian or Venetian. But instead these are considered dialects (or entirely seperate languages, depending). So could you consider Italian just straight up modern Latin? yes, you could make the case. But in the modern day, Classical Latin is typically seen as the standard, so the Romance languages would just be dialects of it. (I mean you could also argue that standard Italian is just a Dialect of Italian, so Classical Latin is also just one dialect of Latin, so Italian and classical Latin and Italian are equally Latin, but Ill leave that to Linguists) 4) True, same with old English, I mean I cant even understand early modern english so... to be fair old Romanian confuses me as well. Although you could consider French and Spanish (and Portuguese) to also be continuations of Late Roman Latin. But the Italian languages no doubt are the closest in the modern day. I believe next is Romanian and then Spanish but that part I could be wrong about. :/
@@thatstorm_spectre1) No, we know for a fact that til 1296 San Marino paid taxes to the pope (therfore wasen't indipendent) like wise the first statutes are dated to 1263 and the Holy See confirmed independece to San Marino only in 1631, this mean that by 755 AD any independece San Marino had is to be see in feudal optic, they pay taxes and troop to the pope and the pope let them some leavel of self government but not true indendece. 2)I'm saing this as a catholic but before the great Schism the pope was at best the first among equals in the pentarchy but it was still subject of the Roman emperor. The pope started the schism (effectively making Catholicism a Orthodox heresy) in name of his desire for power ower the emperors and due to the "donatio contantinii" a fake document stating the Constantine the great had gifted the pope with rule of the wsetern empire and superiority to the emperors, a fake document e a lot of ambition don't make you heri of rome however. 4) i'm answering this because it's easier. the clossest lenguage to Classical latin is Sardinian (it diverged during from latin in the early imperial era) the italian,then spanish,romanian,portugal and finaly french( which is the most divergent and less latin of the latin lenguages). italian howerver is closer than sardinian to late roman latin and vulga latin (they are not the same). 3)First italian dialect are in fact their own lenguages as much as french and romanian however modern italian is an artificial lenguage, we know by now that medieval italic latin (which evolved directly from late roman latin which evolved from Classical latin) was the main lenguage for nobels,merchants and city dwellers in italy at least till 16th century ( when it was displaced by italian) meanwhile vulgar latin (slowy turning in italian "dialects") was the lenguage of the countryside, Dante alighieri seams to have created italian as a lingua franca between the two comunity this make italian a hybrid between latin and romance leguages and it's probaly the reason why it's the most similar to latin. as for italian claim to be the modern latin the reason to me it's simple, in this world many lenguages that had greatly differ from their ancestor lenguages are acknowleged with no problem as their continuation, this is the case of modern persian which it's considered a continuation of middle persian (sassanid era) and old persian (achemenid era) despited being there beign more difference between modern and middle persian than italian and latin, so italian that is a hybrid between latin and a romance leguages(fiorentino), that had replaced latin in the romans own homeland and is the closest lenguages to any version of latin (archaic latin,old latin,classical latin,late latin, vulgar latin,clerical latin and medieval latin) should likewise be acknowleged as latin successor and continuation
Short answer. Europe, as it never actually did fall. Definitely NOT Russia! To be clear Classic Rome did end, but in 3'th century with Edict of Caracalla. It granted citizenship to every person on territory of the Rome. But as result city of Rome itself lost importance, with capital moving to Constantinople. But! Despite common narrative Germanic tribes did not conquered East Rome. With few exceptions, they simply move there and fun fact! Gaining Citizenship. Frankish King Clovis 1 was officially a Roman Consul. Ostrogoth were lead by Roman General and Roman Senate operated under they rule. Even Vandals intervened on order of the Cezar. So called "Barbarian Kingdoms", even if they speak derivative of Latin (French, Spanish, Italian and Romanian) nominally recognized authority of Byzantine Emperor and over time were restoring Roman Law. It is just that Greek Speaking Byzantium, stop recognizing them as the Romans. That was until 8'th century, when after succession crisis in the "Rome". Charlemagne usurped title as ruler of way stronger Province. It is when split actually did happen and for reminder it was nothing new. Constantine the Great defeat two Cezar and one Augustus. For a time at least German Emperor (or Holly Roman Empire) was at least formally recognized by Christendom as symbolical head of whole domain, even if he didn't have real power. Title of King (coming from Charles aka Karl) was initially granted only by Pope. As title related to the Empire. And for reminder Papal State was Byzantine Province, before they were abandoned by Greeks, where Orthodoxy gain hold. Anyway HRE was overthrown by Napoleon and after that we did have constant fight between few German Emperors. Now Europe again is united until Roman Law. Byzantine was overthrown by Ottomans and not recognized as Rome by rest of Europe. Despite them calling themselves Sultanate of Rum. Still, at least formally they hold the Laur of Byzantine Emperor. Russia didn't even exist until 16'th century. So they did not have actual contact with them, beside adopting Orthodoxy. Roman Law is concept alien to them, being more heir to Mongol Empire then anything.
Yet they didn't even speak Latin. The HRE spoke Latin, had defended the Pope in Rome and actually was able to hold the Muslims back, something Byzantine failed to do.
@@delanovanraalte3646 yes and the HRE was able to hold the Muslims back with Charles Martel to the Austrian rulers holding back the Ottoman empire. The HRE also used a lot of Roman culture, spoke Latin, and helped defend Rome.
@@fabianauer1986 They called themselves romans to this day many greeks do still only a greek empire was mentioned during Catherine the great and in the west only to legitimise the "Holy Roman Empire" and austrian dynasty by german historians calling it "byzantivm"
@@nubnubdubdeh Then you have a strange idea of how the HRE has legitimized itself. The title bit Byzantium made it big with the printing press. The HRE first became known because the Italian states accepted it as Rome, Hispania (Spain and Protugal, Gaul (France), the Benelux states, England (Britannia), and later Illyria accepted it as Rome. So a lot of former ones Roman provinces
XD Mi dispiace amici. The other idea I had, was the Kingdom that can't pick a side. I will make it up to you all by doing a video on Italy! Eventually... Actually I don't have a video idea for Italy yet, I might just start reading and wait till something hits me. But if you have any ideas I'll take a look! 😁
Haha nessun problema il mio raga. You could talk about the evolution of Italian culture. From Roman through medieval to modern. The impacts on regions from the various barbarian invasions. Grazie per la risposta
I feel like it would pretty easily be modern Egypt, thanks to the culture at least. Although in general talking about Ancient Egypt would be a good video idea hmmm Edit: went to add it to my idea doc and saw I already had Ancient Egypt on there lol. So at some point that has to happen. But it will be a couple of videos till then 😁
Coa', this is the 3rd video released in the last 24 hours about the Roman Empire I'm watching today. How am I supposed not to think about the Roman Empire with so many videos about it?
I personally think the HRE is a fascinating political entity. Especially the earlier parts. The later Empire devolved into Austrian power projection, but early on it was a real great power in Europe!
@@isathefulani While i do agree in a lot of ways with you that the HRE was not a successor of Rome, I do believe that in the history of the HRE 2 of the leaders do deserve the title of Roman emperor, that being Charlemagne and Otto the 1st. Charlemagne for his conquests of old roman territory in the west, his adoption of Latin, his stance and spread of Christianity, the fact that the Roman crown was held by a women at the time in Constantinople(the idea of a woman being the emperor to old Romans is exactly how he became "crowned" by the pope, whether or not the Pope had the power to do this is questionable though) and the reintroduction of coins styled in the manner of old Roman coins, all in all he has a pretty good claim. Otto on the other hand I sincerely believe he was trying to recreate a new Roman state in the west, the fact he reinstituted old Roman laws, the senate, the titles, the old government offices, coins, capital location, Latin as the main language, commissioned art, buildings, and even stories about and in the style of the classical Roman state makes me believe he was legitimately trying to recreate a new Roman state in the west, it is a shame that his successors would turn their backs on his ideas of what the state should be.
As a Bulgarian(clearly unbiased and totally neutral), Bulgaria is the only state that had their imperial title recognized by the Eastern Romans themselves. Simeon I of Bulgaria went with emperor of Bulgarians and Romans, he was also considered half-roman due to his classical education in the University of Constantinople. In newer times, the Bulgarian king Ferdinand I, during the balkan wars had plans to retake Constantinople and restore the Byzantine empire and he probably got the closest of them all, just a few kilometers from the capital(the site of the battle is in the modern city of Istanbul even). And also the title Tsar, coming from Caeasr, again the Bulgarian ruler Tervel being the first foreigner to be given the title(however at that time, the title did not have the same meaning as it used to have)
to refer to the arguments about language, culture and the not disputed continuity / succession of the Eastern Roman Empire (aka "Byzantium", a term invented in 1555 by Hieronymus Wolf), where is Ελλάδα in this list?
Sorry it took me a second to read the Greek. I really need to learn at least the alphabet. But yes, Greece has the same legitimacy as the Latin states. I made a small mention of them at 13:26, but in hindsight at least mentioning the Megali idea might have been better lol 😅 And yea Byzantium is just the Roman Empire, I needed to have them on the list though or people would ask where Byzantium was 😁
The British and Americans are definitely the closest analogue to the Greek-Roman dynamic (especially when comparing the Hellenic and Anglo worlds). In terms of broader cultural/political influence it's the Arab Caliphates, who ended 1500 years of Greco-Phonecian and Romano-Persian dominance over the Middle East, Central Asia and North Africa. By immediate imperial succession it's the Byzantines who still spoke Latin at court during the Justinian dynasty. Religious succession goes to the Vatican and obviously Italia was a concept for the peninsula that's older than everyone else in Europe other than Greece.
The Ottomans have a (kinda) valid claim to the Roman Empire, as the Patriarch of Constantinople, who had crowned Eastern Roman Emperors for ages, declared that the Ottoman Sultan, was the ruler of the Byzantine Empire.
Hey you could add Kingdom of Soissons has primary heir too they used romains coin and speak latin and they were still part of Western Roman Empire until the fall
Very true, both the Kingdom of Soissons and the Empire of Julius Nepos in Dalmatia can both be considered primary heirs of the same level as Byzantium. Unfortunately neither lived long enough to really matter, but Soissons will always hold a special place in all our hearts ❤️
No not at all, it's just that it's a common argument that I hear that the Pope coronating Charlemagne is a continuation of the way by which Roman Emperors were chosen which isn't the case. I still think the HRE has a decent claim to the heirs of Rome, the Papal Coronation actually playing into their favour as it gave the HRE the position of Universal Empire of Christianity the same way Rome was.
I hate that you are right. However, I think you forgot that Rome itself has the legend of it being built by the 2 brothers Romulus et Rémus who's ancestors are the Trojans. So it all goes back to Greece
Truva Türklerin elinde İstanbul Türklerin elinde Antakya Türklerin elinde Türkler yeterince roma mirasına sahip Hem romanın yıkıcısı hem de romanın varisi olma hakkını taşıyor
I don't disagree about the final verdicts but i feel like more could've been said about bulgaria and serbia. Particularly how the title of tsar came about, which was an interesting story. What their argument was for being successors to rome which although having some parallels with later russia, weren't for entirely the same reasons. Could've gone just a minute more in-depth into that. Overall good video still
For sure! I hope to maybe touch on it during my East Slavic video and if not we'll definitely come back to the south slavs at some point! Can't leave my Balkan bros hanging
LOL. Russia accepted the Byzantine culture and religion through Bulgaria. As Bulgaria translated the holy texts to slavic, not Russia, not Kiev Rus, not Serbia. Bulgaria was the cultural center of the south/east slavs in the 9-10th centuries and help them adopt Christianity. Russia deserves at least 1 point for becoming the center of Orthodox Christianity after the fall of the Balkans to the Ottomans.
Lack of science or misinformation. Vlachs --> Romanians are meanwhile the descendants of the Roman Empire before the Greekization and after the Ottoman conquest.
Spain is Rome bro, we are literally Latin, we had a massive empire, including parts of Italy and Flanders, Spanish, Catalan, and Galician are literally so similar, heck I understand Latin and I'm Spanish.
Yea that's fair bro. I'd say all the Latin countries are Roman, I mean I understand Latin and I'm Romanian. Spain is just unique from the other Latin countries in that they legally have claim to be the Emperors of the Romans. ¡Asi que, Felicidades España!
The truth is that Romans mingled with the Greeks living in Modern day Greece and Anatolia and after the fall of the Western Roman empire a Roman state was created heavily influenced by greek customs.HRE were germanic people adopting latin customs
The true successor to Rome is Brazil. •An empire of continental proportions •Largest total number of Roman-descended people (tens of millions of Iberian and Italian descendants, more than the total population of those respective countries in Europe) •Speaks Brazilian, a direct descendant of Latin •Largest Romance language-speaking country on Earth, with the largest total number of Roman-descended people on Earth. May as well call it the 4th Rome🇧🇷💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💯🗿🇧🇷🇧🇷
3 extra points to Spain for being the legal successor of the Romans, via last Eastern Roman Emperorship. Culture, language, religion, history and title all in one bag 👌
Andronikashvilis could take a title of roman emperors since thier ancestors where Komnenoi imperial dynasty they also ruled Trebizond and Theodoro, but then got kicked out from capital into Georgia hans time to time making from Komnenos megas-komnenos into andronikashvili "the son of andronikos" so it is kinda 0.01 point for Georgia in terms of dynastical heritage, but it could take a title of defenders of Roman Empire and it's emperors since 1204 A.D by creating Empire of Trebizond and letting Komnenos dynasty the original rulers of Eastern Roman Empire to rule over the region in terms of vassalage to Georgian Kingdom, yes culture was bit mixed with Kartvelian and Roman greek cultures but it was like that even in classical roman period because people were living in peace to one another so they did not changed language nor they become Romanized or hellenized at all.
I think the true sucessor of the roman empire was its centre, the city of rome, the only real inheritor, and the actual still living rome. Every empire has its centre, the roman empire had rome, after the fall of an empire it's sucessor is the centre itself, so rome and italy no others
I think the ottomans have the precedent and is the Sultanate of Rum. Obviously it doesn't count, since they were only in Anatolia. And among the Turks the Ottoman is the strongest claim... which is not much either.
Depends on what you consider Roman, I'd give the first place to Italy, but Spain and Romania are both good too. Latin language, Roman festivals, the whole shebang!
My friend the Byzantine Empire is just the Eastern half of the Roman Empire the reason we call it by visiting because the the guy in the Renaissance they hate to admit it that the Roman Empire existed in the mediaeval age aka the dark age
@@fabianauer1986 he has I know but what I mean is not fair to include it in this competition because the Byzantine Empire is not the successor of the Roman Empire there are the Roman Empire
@@zariaalhajmoustafa2573 Yea it's true. But if I didn't include them people would have been asking where Byzantium was, so I figured including them and letting them win was easier 😁
@@thatstorm_spectre I know before even I watch the video when you uploaded the Byzantine Empire they are the winner is like if you included a car in the horse race I wonder who the owner
@@thatstorm_spectre I give you a fun fact I from Syria and we still call the the Greek Orthodox Roman Orthodox because the Greek in that time call themselves Roman and the Greek they live in Syria they even call their church Roman Orthodox
@@thatstorm_spectre but they actually have a strong claim considering they're kind of a remnant of the russian empire considering they're the only part that never became communist
Est Europa nunc unita Et unita maneat Una in diversitate Pacem mundi augeat Semper regnant in Europa Fides et iustitia Et libertas populorum In maiore patria Cives, floreat Europa Opus magnum vocat vos Stellae signa sunt in caelo Aureae, quae iungant nos O7 🇪🇺
Your statement on Russian cultural points is nonsense. If the Byzantines are literally Rome (and they literally are, you say this multiple times), then the Russians taking direct inspiration from them would grant them cultural Roman points. Administration and religion and culture were so directly mirrored off of Eastern Rome, so the fact that you give other countries points for just giving nods to Rome in their national anthem but not to Russia is insane. Your standard on them taking inspiration from a version of Rome which pop-historians don’t consider “Roman” and thus not being Roman enough makes no sense. That’s like judging Eastern Rome off of the standard or the pre-republic Roman kingdom period. Just because they don’t have much in common with that specific iteration of Rome doesn’t make them any less Roman.
The issue is that everyone is claiming lineage to the Roman Empire of the Classical Era, if Russia wants to claim lineage to the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire of the Medieval Era that would be a different discussion, just like how the entire outcome would have been different had we been talking about successors to the Roman Kingdom and Roman Republic. Just because you have cultural overlap with one era of a nation doesn't mean that you necessarily have claim to other eras of that nation which had a different culture. Russia claims to be a third Rome, not a second Byzantium.
@@secco1908 We have our own identity which is that of conquest of the largest empires. The Chinese, we conquered them, the Persians we conquered them even allying with the byzantines in the 500´s, even the romans were defeated by us and then later the remnant of rome was conquered. Our identity is that of incorporating everything we have learned from others.
@@secco1908 Well, if the goal was assimilation of the conquered subjects it could be achieved. But if you look at the history of the Turks, or of central asian nomads in general like the mongols as well, rather than assimilate we become sedentary too and thus a civilisation is formed where the rulers are the former nomads now turned aristocracy, while the ruled are the people. If the rulers had decided to oppress and assimilate, they could easily rebel leading to needless conflict, why do that when you can enjoy the riches by just letting everyone be.
@@Deibi078 The Turks conquered China multiple times, even during the warring period 2 of the states’ were of turkic origin, the Xiongnu were also of turkic origin. So were the Rouran Khaganates. As for the mongol empire, most of that army was turkic even Genghis himself was a half turk, as seen by thr ancestry of his mother.
An analog to the roman state kinda continued to exist INSIDE the ottoman empire after 1453, the Rum Millet was a semi-autonomus administrative branch of the ottoman government responsible for execution of the laws within greek orthodox inhabited territories of the ottoman state and was headed by the patriach of contantinople.
@@thatstorm_spectre Hungary was the last remaining monarchy from the Habsburg empire and Habsburgs where thrue inheritance rightfull emperors of HRE (basicly western Rome) and thrue Spain rightfull sucesors of Byzantium (Eastern Rome) but all that was up untill 1946 when they abolished their monarchy
Not gonna lie, you're hating on the ottoman claim, There is definitly more cultural continuity between the ottoman empire and the byzantines than most nations on this list. The public baths, the food, the music and many more cultural customs. Just by nature of having the byzantine population in their state gives them continuity. Unless you think that population just evaporated ? Most studies conclude that a lot of turkish settlers came into anatolia but most of the population just converted over time. You're also kinda ignoring the right of conquest to roman legitimacy is kind of a big deal. Not saying that the ottoman claim has any actual validity and who fucking cares anyways we're in the 21st century anyways but giving them 0 points is straight hating
Yeah, finally someone who knows some of the nuances of the ottoman claim, there´s a reason Mehmed the 2nd called himself Kayser-i rum. The ottomans are descendants of the Sultanat-i Rum as well
Hope you enjoyed! I'll get back to work researching for the Eastern Slav video, but man, who knew Slavic history was this complex?
A couple of corrections
1)san Marino indipendence was first attested in the 12th century as refuasal to pay taxes to pope, there is no proof it was indipendent before and all the reason to believe that it was part of the pontifical state.
2) the Vatican or pontifical state was first made indipendent by Charlemagne, then it was conquered by Italy and then, after 59 years , it was reacreated by Mussolini as part of the Lateran pacts.
3) while most people believe Italian is a romance lenguage and a dialect of Latin, that old theory is being increasingly challenged by our growing understanding of Latin and it’s evolution, now day linguist would point out that Italian is a direct evolution and continuation of late Roman latin which in turn was the lenguage of the western Roman Empire and a natural evolution of Classical Latin, making Italian effectively modern latin (or the closer thing to it at least).
4) related to the above, latin is historically divided in Archaic Latin (romolus),old latin (Punic wars eras), classical latin (Caesar to third century and then lingua franca and then late latin( from which Italian evolved) all these were not necessarily intelligible between each others for example Cicero wasn’t capable of understanding archaic latin believing it to be etruscan (which is non a indoeuropea lenguage). Classical Latin was spoken as standard lenguage only from a the times of Caesar to the third century AD and in the late empire was used as a lingua franca for the two halves of Rome,the official lenguage of the west was Late Roman latin ( aka proto Italian) and the most used lenguage of the east was Greek.
Thanks for the corrections! I sometimes overlook things, but here's what I found lemme know if my sources are off
1) while it's true the independence of San Marino in 301 is only backed up really by legend, we know for certain that by 755 AD San Marino was functionally independent thanks to the Liber Pontificalis and by the 8th century we know it was called the Abbot of San Marino
2) yea, true. The Vaticans legitimacy to Rome isn't through the Papal States, but from the Popes themselves, because the Papal states have had an interesting history to say the least
3) this one is complex. Because it depends. I'll assume you're Italian because you called the Papal States, the Pontifical State like Stato Pontifico in Italian. Then for example how do you determine which "Italian language" is standard Italian and which is a Dialect of it (assuming for a second all the languages of Italy are Italian dialects and not unique languages). The Kingdom of Italy chose Florentine and Tuscan to be the standard, so that is considered standard Italian, but they could have just as easily chosen Sardinian or Sicilian or Venetian. But instead these are considered dialects (or entirely seperate languages, depending). So could you consider Italian just straight up modern Latin? yes, you could make the case. But in the modern day, Classical Latin is typically seen as the standard, so the Romance languages would just be dialects of it. (I mean you could also argue that standard Italian is just a Dialect of Italian, so Classical Latin is also just one dialect of Latin, so Italian and classical Latin and Italian are equally Latin, but Ill leave that to Linguists)
4) True, same with old English, I mean I cant even understand early modern english so... to be fair old Romanian confuses me as well. Although you could consider French and Spanish (and Portuguese) to also be continuations of Late Roman Latin. But the Italian languages no doubt are the closest in the modern day. I believe next is Romanian and then Spanish but that part I could be wrong about. :/
@@thatstorm_spectre1) No, we know for a fact that til 1296 San Marino paid taxes to the pope (therfore wasen't indipendent) like wise the first statutes are dated to 1263 and the Holy See confirmed independece to San Marino only in 1631, this mean that by 755 AD any independece San Marino had is to be see in feudal optic, they pay taxes and troop to the pope and the pope let them some leavel of self government but not true indendece.
2)I'm saing this as a catholic but before the great Schism the pope was at best the first among equals in the pentarchy but it was still subject of the Roman emperor.
The pope started the schism (effectively making Catholicism a Orthodox heresy) in name of his desire for power ower the emperors and due to the "donatio contantinii" a fake document stating the Constantine the great had gifted the pope with rule of the wsetern empire and superiority to the emperors, a fake document e a lot of ambition don't make you heri of rome however.
4) i'm answering this because it's easier.
the clossest lenguage to Classical latin is Sardinian (it diverged during from latin in the early imperial era) the italian,then spanish,romanian,portugal and finaly french( which is the most divergent and less latin of the latin lenguages).
italian howerver is closer than sardinian to late roman latin and vulga latin (they are not the same).
3)First italian dialect are in fact their own lenguages as much as french and romanian however modern italian is an artificial lenguage, we know by now that medieval italic latin (which evolved directly from late roman latin which evolved from Classical latin) was the main lenguage for nobels,merchants and city dwellers in italy at least till 16th century ( when it was displaced by italian) meanwhile vulgar latin (slowy turning in italian "dialects") was the lenguage of the countryside, Dante alighieri seams to have created italian as a lingua franca between the two comunity this make italian a hybrid between latin and romance leguages and it's probaly the reason why it's the most similar to latin.
as for italian claim to be the modern latin the reason to me it's simple, in this world many lenguages that had greatly differ from their ancestor lenguages are acknowleged with no problem as their continuation, this is the case of modern persian which it's considered a continuation of middle persian (sassanid era) and old persian (achemenid era) despited being there beign more difference between modern and middle persian than italian and latin, so italian that is a hybrid between latin and a romance leguages(fiorentino), that had replaced latin in the romans own homeland and is the closest lenguages to any version of latin (archaic latin,old latin,classical latin,late latin, vulgar latin,clerical latin and medieval latin) should likewise be acknowleged as latin successor and continuation
Short answer. Europe, as it never actually did fall. Definitely NOT Russia!
To be clear Classic Rome did end, but in 3'th century with Edict of Caracalla. It granted citizenship to every person on territory of the Rome. But as result city of Rome itself lost importance, with capital moving to Constantinople. But! Despite common narrative Germanic tribes did not conquered East Rome. With few exceptions, they simply move there and fun fact! Gaining Citizenship. Frankish King Clovis 1 was officially a Roman Consul. Ostrogoth were lead by Roman General and Roman Senate operated under they rule. Even Vandals intervened on order of the Cezar.
So called "Barbarian Kingdoms", even if they speak derivative of Latin (French, Spanish, Italian and Romanian) nominally recognized authority of Byzantine Emperor and over time were restoring Roman Law. It is just that Greek Speaking Byzantium, stop recognizing them as the Romans. That was until 8'th century, when after succession crisis in the "Rome". Charlemagne usurped title as ruler of way stronger Province. It is when split actually did happen and for reminder it was nothing new. Constantine the Great defeat two Cezar and one Augustus.
For a time at least German Emperor (or Holly Roman Empire) was at least formally recognized by Christendom as symbolical head of whole domain, even if he didn't have real power. Title of King (coming from Charles aka Karl) was initially granted only by Pope. As title related to the Empire. And for reminder Papal State was Byzantine Province, before they were abandoned by Greeks, where Orthodoxy gain hold. Anyway HRE was overthrown by Napoleon and after that we did have constant fight between few German Emperors. Now Europe again is united until Roman Law.
Byzantine was overthrown by Ottomans and not recognized as Rome by rest of Europe. Despite them calling themselves Sultanate of Rum. Still, at least formally they hold the Laur of Byzantine Emperor. Russia didn't even exist until 16'th century. So they did not have actual contact with them, beside adopting Orthodoxy. Roman Law is concept alien to them, being more heir to Mongol Empire then anything.
BTW it is why crowning Emperor by Pope (Byzantine province) was so important.
"Byzantium" is not an heir to the Roman Empire - it IS the Roman Empire
Half of it. They just start pretending that other half don't exist.
The fake one!
@@nosferatus777interesting way to spell “real”
There is no inheritor, the "byzantines" were the roman empire
As far as I know, they didn’t even call themselves “The Byzantines”, rather “The Eastern Roman Empire”.
Yet they didn't even speak Latin. The HRE spoke Latin, had defended the Pope in Rome and actually was able to hold the Muslims back, something Byzantine failed to do.
@@lephinor2458they still were truly roman but forgot thier heritage and the muslims forced europe to change how it waged war
@@delanovanraalte3646 yes and the HRE was able to hold the Muslims back with Charles Martel to the Austrian rulers holding back the Ottoman empire. The HRE also used a lot of Roman culture, spoke Latin, and helped defend Rome.
@@lephinor2458 yet they were not roman nor an empire for that matter more a really strong federation that was the strongest power in all of Europe
"Every American Monarchists favorite Empire" is a call out i never thought I'd get hit with today 0:53
Fun fact greeks called them selfs Roman all the way until the greek revolution
the music of farja faraji is amazing
درود بر فریا فرجی
i absolutely love youre videos man
i love to see other romanian pop off as youtubers
Doamne ajuta si tie
aint no way this guy pulled up the civ 6 theater square when talking about culture. youre cooked buddy,
I got Civ on the mind 😂
And also the Civ 6 City Center icon on Constantinople 😂
"Byzantium" was not actually called that it was the Eastern Roman Empire or just the Roman Empire they are Romans
depending on the language or monarchy. It was also often called the greek empire
@@fabianauer1986 They called themselves romans to this day many greeks do still only a greek empire was mentioned during Catherine the great and in the west only to legitimise the "Holy Roman Empire" and austrian dynasty by german historians calling it "byzantivm"
@@nubnubdubdeh Then you have a strange idea of how the HRE has legitimized itself. The title bit Byzantium made it big with the printing press. The HRE first became known because the Italian states accepted it as Rome, Hispania (Spain and Protugal, Gaul (France), the Benelux states, England (Britannia), and later Illyria accepted it as Rome. So a lot of former ones Roman provinces
The ottomans claiming to be heirs of the Empire of the Romans is similar to chimpanzees claiming succession from Humans.
Exactly 😂🤣
You're pronunciation of Caesar at the start was crisp.
This channel is lit. Make more good content like this. I'm subbed.
"The soft underbelly of the Axis" 😭 💀 Bro did not have do do us like that
XD Mi dispiace amici. The other idea I had, was the Kingdom that can't pick a side.
I will make it up to you all by doing a video on Italy!
Eventually...
Actually I don't have a video idea for Italy yet, I might just start reading and wait till something hits me. But if you have any ideas I'll take a look! 😁
Haha nessun problema il mio raga. You could talk about the evolution of Italian culture. From Roman through medieval to modern. The impacts on regions from the various barbarian invasions. Grazie per la risposta
you are one of the most underrated youtubers i’ve seen, keep it up man!
I loved the video! especially the introductions are super cool! As a first video ive seen of you, youre gonna get big
also: i just realised ive seen stuff from you before sooooo
discord when?
Can make a video about who is the heir to the ancient Egypt
I feel like it would pretty easily be modern Egypt, thanks to the culture at least. Although in general talking about Ancient Egypt would be a good video idea hmmm
Edit: went to add it to my idea doc and saw I already had Ancient Egypt on there lol. So at some point that has to happen. But it will be a couple of videos till then 😁
Fun Fact: If we're going to count only bloodlines, Brazil could be considered a successor of the Roman Empire (only good one really)
what about all of latin america and latin africa
I don't want Carthage to become the next Roman Empire, and you should know that mister @@FireWire917
Finland.
Coa', this is the 3rd video released in the last 24 hours about the Roman Empire I'm watching today. How am I supposed not to think about the Roman Empire with so many videos about it?
Fun fact in my country Syria we called The Greek Orthodox Roman Orthodox or just روم rum
These is the actual best things on youtube🙏🙏🙏
Finally, an HRE recognizer. There can be two Roman Empires, there had been before, the the HRE and Byzantium were both Rome
I personally think the HRE is a fascinating political entity. Especially the earlier parts. The later Empire devolved into Austrian power projection, but early on it was a real great power in Europe!
It’s not
@@isathefulani While i do agree in a lot of ways with you that the HRE was not a successor of Rome, I do believe that in the history of the HRE 2 of the leaders do deserve the title of Roman emperor, that being Charlemagne and Otto the 1st. Charlemagne for his conquests of old roman territory in the west, his adoption of Latin, his stance and spread of Christianity, the fact that the Roman crown was held by a women at the time in Constantinople(the idea of a woman being the emperor to old Romans is exactly how he became "crowned" by the pope, whether or not the Pope had the power to do this is questionable though) and the reintroduction of coins styled in the manner of old Roman coins, all in all he has a pretty good claim. Otto on the other hand I sincerely believe he was trying to recreate a new Roman state in the west, the fact he reinstituted old Roman laws, the senate, the titles, the old government offices, coins, capital location, Latin as the main language, commissioned art, buildings, and even stories about and in the style of the classical Roman state makes me believe he was legitimately trying to recreate a new Roman state in the west, it is a shame that his successors would turn their backs on his ideas of what the state should be.
the clip's molar: it's time to restore the Roman empire
As a Bulgarian(clearly unbiased and totally neutral), Bulgaria is the only state that had their imperial title recognized by the Eastern Romans themselves. Simeon I of Bulgaria went with emperor of Bulgarians and Romans, he was also considered half-roman due to his classical education in the University of Constantinople. In newer times, the Bulgarian king Ferdinand I, during the balkan wars had plans to retake Constantinople and restore the Byzantine empire and he probably got the closest of them all, just a few kilometers from the capital(the site of the battle is in the modern city of Istanbul even). And also the title Tsar, coming from Caeasr, again the Bulgarian ruler Tervel being the first foreigner to be given the title(however at that time, the title did not have the same meaning as it used to have)
to refer to the arguments about language, culture and the not disputed continuity / succession of the Eastern Roman Empire (aka "Byzantium", a term invented in 1555 by Hieronymus Wolf), where is Ελλάδα in this list?
Sorry it took me a second to read the Greek. I really need to learn at least the alphabet. But yes, Greece has the same legitimacy as the Latin states. I made a small mention of them at 13:26, but in hindsight at least mentioning the Megali idea might have been better lol 😅
And yea Byzantium is just the Roman Empire, I needed to have them on the list though or people would ask where Byzantium was 😁
ah yes, "shove Greece in here as well if you feel like it" @@thatstorm_spectre
Megali Idea: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megali_Idea
2:00 Sons of Mars
Holy Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire and Italy are
Hoy empire Germany ? 😂😂😂😂😂
I still say Spain has the last legit chance to the title.
the Ottomans did actually adopt a lot of Byzantine laws
Wrong, It's Greece. Hands down.
Turn the volume of all the music down by 20-30%. 1:48 can barelly hear your voice here.
Yea, the effect from the radio voice lowered my voice volume more than I realized lol. I was already used to the sound so I didn't notice
The British and Americans are definitely the closest analogue to the Greek-Roman dynamic (especially when comparing the Hellenic and Anglo worlds). In terms of broader cultural/political influence it's the Arab Caliphates, who ended 1500 years of Greco-Phonecian and Romano-Persian dominance over the Middle East, Central Asia and North Africa. By immediate imperial succession it's the Byzantines who still spoke Latin at court during the Justinian dynasty. Religious succession goes to the Vatican and obviously Italia was a concept for the peninsula that's older than everyone else in Europe other than Greece.
10:47 She is the mother of mother Russia
The Ottomans have a (kinda) valid claim to the Roman Empire, as the Patriarch of Constantinople, who had crowned Eastern Roman Emperors for ages, declared that the Ottoman Sultan, was the ruler of the Byzantine Empire.
7:51 whats the music that starts here?
I have all the music listed in order of appearance in the description.
But at Part 3 it's Pirates of the Mediterranean by Farya Faraji
@@thatstorm_spectre Thank you
love ur videos bro keep going!
Hey you could add Kingdom of Soissons has primary heir too they used romains coin and speak latin and they were still part of Western Roman Empire until the fall
Very true, both the Kingdom of Soissons and the Empire of Julius Nepos in Dalmatia can both be considered primary heirs of the same level as Byzantium. Unfortunately neither lived long enough to really matter, but Soissons will always hold a special place in all our hearts ❤️
3:54 not a very good argument. There’s no rule saying that they half to coronate their rulers the same way.
No not at all, it's just that it's a common argument that I hear that the Pope coronating Charlemagne is a continuation of the way by which Roman Emperors were chosen which isn't the case.
I still think the HRE has a decent claim to the heirs of Rome, the Papal Coronation actually playing into their favour as it gave the HRE the position of Universal Empire of Christianity the same way Rome was.
@@thatstorm_spectre Don’t you take that tone with me young man!😡
@@jbstarkiller4626 womp womp
As Romanian, I will say none shall claim anything until the coming of the Imperator, that other reasons,
I hate that you are right. However, I think you forgot that Rome itself has the legend of it being built by the 2 brothers Romulus et Rémus who's ancestors are the Trojans. So it all goes back to Greece
În the end we are all Greek
🇬🇷🇬🇷🙏🙏
The trojans weren’t Greeks they were luiwians and vassals of the Hittite empire, the greeks were the acheans aka Troy’s enemy
This is a legend
Truva Türklerin elinde
İstanbul Türklerin elinde
Antakya Türklerin elinde
Türkler yeterince roma mirasına sahip
Hem romanın yıkıcısı hem de romanın varisi olma hakkını taşıyor
Spain gang
SERBIA WILL RESTORE THE ROMAN EMPIRE
I don't disagree about the final verdicts but i feel like more could've been said about bulgaria and serbia. Particularly how the title of tsar came about, which was an interesting story. What their argument was for being successors to rome which although having some parallels with later russia, weren't for entirely the same reasons. Could've gone just a minute more in-depth into that. Overall good video still
For sure! I hope to maybe touch on it during my East Slavic video and if not we'll definitely come back to the south slavs at some point! Can't leave my Balkan bros hanging
@@thatstorm_spectre nice to hear bro. Appreciate the content all the same, keep it up, it's good. 😁😁
OMG YOUR CONTENT IS AWESOME
ZITO I RHOMA
Thank you so much!
What language is Zito I Rhoma?
@@thatstorm_spectre Greek
@@CultOfAnatolia7645 I'm so sorry lol, Greek is a language I need to learn more. But in Greek it's ζητω η Ρώμη? "I'm asking for Rome?"
@@thatstorm_spectre ah sorry :c
And no it's LONG LIVE ROME
There was no heir. After the west fell the greek carried the legend of the roman empire and the roman empire truly fell in 1435
Nosotros somos ROMA RUSIA SERBIA BULGARIA Y GRECIA
.
LOL.
Russia accepted the Byzantine culture and religion through Bulgaria.
As Bulgaria translated the holy texts to slavic, not Russia, not Kiev Rus, not Serbia.
Bulgaria was the cultural center of the south/east slavs in the 9-10th centuries and help them adopt Christianity.
Russia deserves at least 1 point for becoming the center of Orthodox Christianity after the fall of the Balkans to the Ottomans.
Rome died with Constantinople period. No one is the successors to the Romans.
Lack of science or misinformation. Vlachs --> Romanians are meanwhile the descendants of the Roman Empire before the Greekization and after the Ottoman conquest.
The US is the successor to Rome because I said so.
@@spiritgaming1442 The country where school shootings occur every Monday?
great video, 10/10, subscribed. Vatican for the win 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦
Where is beloved San Marino?!? :(
Nevermind I saw San Marino!!1!11! :D
I think you mean, the modern Roman Empire! 🇸🇲🇸🇲🦅🦅💪💪
@@thatstorm_spectre They are a great republic! No need for incompetent monarchs!!
@@microwavegoesmhbmhbhmhhmhm5225 Roman Republic then 🇸🇲🇸🇲🦅🦅💪💪
actually, the real heir to Rome is Liechtenstein because it's the last monarchy directly tied to the HRE. I will not elaborate further
Ottomans are not Romans, they're their own thing, no linguistic ties no cultural ties, no same religion continuity, Ottomans are nor Romans
Well about culture and laws can be argued.
Lore of Who is the Heir to the Roman Empire? Momentum 100
Spain is Rome bro, we are literally Latin, we had a massive empire, including parts of Italy and Flanders, Spanish, Catalan, and Galician are literally so similar, heck I understand Latin and I'm Spanish.
Yea that's fair bro. I'd say all the Latin countries are Roman, I mean I understand Latin and I'm Romanian. Spain is just unique from the other Latin countries in that they legally have claim to be the Emperors of the Romans. ¡Asi que, Felicidades España!
Me I'm the true Heir.
Ave Imperater!
The truth is that Romans mingled with the Greeks living in Modern day Greece and Anatolia and after the fall of the Western Roman empire a Roman state was created heavily influenced by greek customs.HRE were germanic people adopting latin customs
The Larping is so bad even the Chinese are laying claim to the Roman legacy.
Maybe the true Roman Empire were the friends we made along the way
Byzantine empire wasn’t eastern Roman Empire before renaming
Did I really just leaned that San Marino and the Pope have the best claims for the Leader of the Roman Empire if its newly founded
The true successor to Rome is Brazil.
•An empire of continental proportions
•Largest total number of Roman-descended people (tens of millions of Iberian and Italian descendants, more than the total population of those respective countries in Europe)
•Speaks Brazilian, a direct descendant of Latin
•Largest Romance language-speaking country on Earth, with the largest total number of Roman-descended people on Earth.
May as well call it the 4th Rome🇧🇷💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💯🗿🇧🇷🇧🇷
cool
3 extra points to Spain for being the legal successor of the Romans, via last Eastern Roman Emperorship. Culture, language, religion, history and title all in one bag 👌
😂😂😂😂 religión? Title ? 😂😂😂😂
Andronikashvilis could take a title of roman emperors since thier ancestors where Komnenoi imperial dynasty they also ruled Trebizond and Theodoro, but then got kicked out from capital into Georgia hans time to time making from Komnenos megas-komnenos into andronikashvili "the son of andronikos" so it is kinda 0.01 point for Georgia in terms of dynastical heritage, but it could take a title of defenders of Roman Empire and it's emperors since 1204 A.D by creating Empire of Trebizond and letting Komnenos dynasty the original rulers of Eastern Roman Empire to rule over the region in terms of vassalage to Georgian Kingdom, yes culture was bit mixed with Kartvelian and Roman greek cultures but it was like that even in classical roman period because people were living in peace to one another so they did not changed language nor they become Romanized or hellenized at all.
I think the true sucessor of the roman empire was its centre, the city of rome, the only real inheritor, and the actual still living rome. Every empire has its centre, the roman empire had rome, after the fall of an empire it's sucessor is the centre itself, so rome and italy no others
I think the ottomans have the precedent and is the Sultanate of Rum. Obviously it doesn't count, since they were only in Anatolia. And among the Turks the Ottoman is the strongest claim... which is not much either.
It would be rightfully Spain in my opinion but, the bourbons took control during the Spanish war of succession
😃😂😂😂😂
.
@@rossiskaya ?
@@rossiskayawhat’s so funny?
Roman Kingdom > Roman Republic > Roman Empire > Western Roman Empire > Holy Roman Empire > Austrian Empire. Vienna was the true third Rome!
I honestly wanna know which is most "roman"
Depends on what you consider Roman, I'd give the first place to Italy, but Spain and Romania are both good too. Latin language, Roman festivals, the whole shebang!
Eastern Rome is called Eastern *Rome* for a reason, they are ROME not an inheritor
YEAH THE TRUE SUCCESSORS TO ROME THAT WILL NEVER FALL, SAN MARINO AND THE VATICAN CITY
The ottomans after all they did become Kaiser I Rum
Religión ?
The Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church. No, I will not elaborate.
There is bo competition of which who is the heir it is obvious it's byzantium they were the eastern roman empire 💀
My friend the Byzantine Empire is just the Eastern half of the Roman Empire the reason we call it by visiting because the the guy in the Renaissance they hate to admit it that the Roman Empire existed in the mediaeval age aka the dark age
The person who invented the name was a big fan of Byzantium. it was simply a name so that everyone could quickly identify the time period etc
@@fabianauer1986 he has I know but what I mean is not fair to include it in this competition because the Byzantine Empire is not the successor of the Roman Empire there are the Roman Empire
@@zariaalhajmoustafa2573 Yea it's true. But if I didn't include them people would have been asking where Byzantium was, so I figured including them and letting them win was easier 😁
@@thatstorm_spectre I know before even I watch the video when you uploaded the Byzantine Empire they are the winner is like if you included a car in the horse race I wonder who the owner
@@thatstorm_spectre I give you a fun fact I from Syria and we still call the the Greek Orthodox Roman Orthodox because the Greek in that time call themselves Roman and the Greek they live in Syria they even call their church Roman Orthodox
Obviously Romania 💪💪💪 (jk, good video though!)
but through the Avignion papacy, the line of popes was broken
This is the main victory argument mate! Great remark!
Finland
säkkijärven polkka moment
@@thatstorm_spectre but they actually have a strong claim considering they're kind of a remnant of the russian empire considering they're the only part that never became communist
Brazil is the true inheritor
The Brazilian Empire shall rise again!! 🇧🇷🇧🇷💪💪🦅🦅
Lets be honest the EU is the new 3rd Roman Empire
Est Europa nunc unita
Et unita maneat
Una in diversitate
Pacem mundi augeat
Semper regnant in Europa
Fides et iustitia
Et libertas populorum
In maiore patria
Cives, floreat Europa
Opus magnum vocat vos
Stellae signa sunt in caelo
Aureae, quae iungant nos
O7 🇪🇺
The sucessor to the Roman Empire was the Portuguese empire and the after the UKPB become the Brazilian empire 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡
YOU ARE WROOONG! The real descendant of ROME is THE GLORIOUS NATION of MOLDOVA!!
Moldova!!! RAAAHHH 🇲🇩🇲🇩💪💪🦅🦅🦅💪💪🇲🇩🇲🇩
Să trăiți frații!
W. WE MOLDOVANS are the TRUE inheritors of ROME! We even had our own Julius Ceaser! (aka Stephen the Great)
finland
Your statement on Russian cultural points is nonsense. If the Byzantines are literally Rome (and they literally are, you say this multiple times), then the Russians taking direct inspiration from them would grant them cultural Roman points. Administration and religion and culture were so directly mirrored off of Eastern Rome, so the fact that you give other countries points for just giving nods to Rome in their national anthem but not to Russia is insane. Your standard on them taking inspiration from a version of Rome which pop-historians don’t consider “Roman” and thus not being Roman enough makes no sense. That’s like judging Eastern Rome off of the standard or the pre-republic Roman kingdom period. Just because they don’t have much in common with that specific iteration of Rome doesn’t make them any less Roman.
The issue is that everyone is claiming lineage to the Roman Empire of the Classical Era, if Russia wants to claim lineage to the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire of the Medieval Era that would be a different discussion, just like how the entire outcome would have been different had we been talking about successors to the Roman Kingdom and Roman Republic. Just because you have cultural overlap with one era of a nation doesn't mean that you necessarily have claim to other eras of that nation which had a different culture. Russia claims to be a third Rome, not a second Byzantium.
The last latim global Empire was Portugal so... I think Portugal should be the one, just one example...😐
Turkey obviously
@@secco1908 We have our own identity which is that of conquest of the largest empires. The Chinese, we conquered them, the Persians we conquered them even allying with the byzantines in the 500´s, even the romans were defeated by us and then later the remnant of rome was conquered. Our identity is that of incorporating everything we have learned from others.
@@adidoki when did the turks conquerted china? lol
@@secco1908 Well, if the goal was assimilation of the conquered subjects it could be achieved. But if you look at the history of the Turks, or of central asian nomads in general like the mongols as well, rather than assimilate we become sedentary too and thus a civilisation is formed where the rulers are the former nomads now turned aristocracy, while the ruled are the people. If the rulers had decided to oppress and assimilate, they could easily rebel leading to needless conflict, why do that when you can enjoy the riches by just letting everyone be.
@@Deibi078 The Turks conquered China multiple times, even during the warring period 2 of the states’ were of turkic origin, the Xiongnu were also of turkic origin. So were the Rouran Khaganates. As for the mongol empire, most of that army was turkic even Genghis himself was a half turk, as seen by thr ancestry of his mother.
What heir? Eastern roman Empire still exist at that time... Lol
Romania
Farya farija Fans ASSEMBLE
An analog to the roman state kinda continued to exist INSIDE the ottoman empire after 1453, the Rum Millet was a semi-autonomus administrative branch of the ottoman government responsible for execution of the laws within greek orthodox inhabited territories of the ottoman state and was headed by the patriach of contantinople.
Caesar spoke more greek than latin hahahahahahahahahahah american history is so funny😂
Well that's what Suetonius writes in his work The 12 Caesars, or De Vita Caesarum.
Also I'm Romanian 😁
VATICAN SUCCESOR OF ROMAN EMPIRE!!!!
Legaly last part of the Roman empire was Hungary
How so?
@@thatstorm_spectre Hungary was the last remaining monarchy from the Habsburg empire and Habsburgs where thrue inheritance rightfull emperors of HRE (basicly western Rome) and thrue Spain rightfull sucesors of Byzantium (Eastern Rome) but all that was up untill 1946 when they abolished their monarchy
If the HRE. Is western rome the United States are the rightful heir of the Han dynasty china
@@jkgzjhp1705 ahhhhhh hahaha OK ok I understand. So Eastern Europe is home to 7 Romes!
O7 🇬🇷🇷🇸🇧🇬🇷🇴🇭🇺🇹🇷🇷🇺
Bro is Coping
Idk man, we all know Moldova is actually the real heir of Rome.
Слава Молдові!!! 🇲🇩🇲🇩🦅🦅🔥🔥
lol at russia
has no clue about ottoman state culture
Not gonna lie, you're hating on the ottoman claim, There is definitly more cultural continuity between the ottoman empire and the byzantines than most nations on this list. The public baths, the food, the music and many more cultural customs. Just by nature of having the byzantine population in their state gives them continuity. Unless you think that population just evaporated ? Most studies conclude that a lot of turkish settlers came into anatolia but most of the population just converted over time. You're also kinda ignoring the right of conquest to roman legitimacy is kind of a big deal. Not saying that the ottoman claim has any actual validity and who fucking cares anyways we're in the 21st century anyways but giving them 0 points is straight hating
Yeah, finally someone who knows some of the nuances of the ottoman claim, there´s a reason Mehmed the 2nd called himself Kayser-i rum. The ottomans are descendants of the Sultanat-i Rum as well